In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al-Queda members, though there is no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.
So basically, Bush isn’t the only liar, just the one that gets hell for it.
I am not saying that Bush should not get hell, I am saying there are others to blame as well and people are only seeing and hearing what they want to hear because it suits them.
Everyone wants to blame Bush but it’s funny to me that all of the sudden a lot of the democats changed their stories as soon as election and primary time came around. To quote John Kerry in October of 2002:
I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.
Ah, but if everything had gone well, you’d hardly step in when people started bashing those pessimistic liberals and say, hey–they share part of the credit for disarming Saddam.
(I have this feeling that the justification of the 2003 war in Iraq will be one of those historical issues that will be fiercely debated forever–far more than in the last two years.)
You don’t know how I would react, you are making an assumption… If everything had gone well I would have said that our government had done a good job, not any party in particular. Since both sides take part in the government, both should be held accountable for the actions of this nation and both should get credit for the good that they do.
To quote Hillary Clinton:
So basically, Bush isn’t the only liar, just the one that gets hell for it.
Yeah, why should the president get hell for initiating a war when other people were in agreement? [/sarcasm]
I am not saying that Bush should not get hell, I am saying there are others to blame as well and people are only seeing and hearing what they want to hear because it suits them.
Everyone wants to blame Bush but it’s funny to me that all of the sudden a lot of the democats changed their stories as soon as election and primary time came around. To quote John Kerry in October of 2002:
Ah, but if everything had gone well, you’d hardly step in when people started bashing those pessimistic liberals and say, hey–they share part of the credit for disarming Saddam.
(I have this feeling that the justification of the 2003 war in Iraq will be one of those historical issues that will be fiercely debated forever–far more than in the last two years.)
You don’t know how I would react, you are making an assumption… If everything had gone well I would have said that our government had done a good job, not any party in particular. Since both sides take part in the government, both should be held accountable for the actions of this nation and both should get credit for the good that they do.